What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
73 Comments
- SubEl, on 02/18/2009, -5/+103Drupal and the US Government are perfect for one another. Both are extremely powerful yet wildly inefficient solutions that, while feature packed and loaded with potential, tend to do too much when little is needed and too little when much is needed. Both allow for considerable input and customization, so long as you understand and take advantage of their distinct way of doing things. That said, I've been developing sites in Drupal for a few years now and, just like my lovable, broken United States, I probably won't leave it for anything else so long as it remains free.
- peterjmag, on 02/19/2009, -1/+17Epic analogy.
- laaabaseball, on 02/18/2009, -0/+11http://www.recovery.gov/?q=node had to point it out
- MrChunks, on 02/19/2009, -0/+10Drupal isn't a framework. How can you compare Drupal with Zend/jQuery/Mootools?
- sirkitree, on 02/18/2009, -1/+10Yeah, it's not the best implementation of Drupal, but it's still Drupal, which has me excited!
- Antimatt, on 02/19/2009, -1/+9baseball guy was just pointing out that the clean URLs aren't turned on.
- Baryn, on 02/20/2009, -0/+7I am not worthy to reply to that comment. You win digg.
- MangalaIII, on 02/19/2009, -1/+8They're using geocities.
- serif69, on 02/19/2009, -0/+7Apparently.
- peterjmag, on 02/19/2009, -1/+7Okay, what do you recommend as an alternative? (Serious question)
- ethana2, on 02/19/2009, -0/+6KITTEH FUND
- MrChunks, on 02/19/2009, -0/+5Wordpress? Wordpress is a blogging application that can be kind of pestered into being a CMS, but not a great one. It's different to Drupal in all honesty.
- agentVivid, on 02/19/2009, -0/+5"Other" - $8 Billion
- Ghoul, on 02/19/2009, -1/+5Bloat? If you don't need some functionality, then turn off the module that provides it.
I quite like the interface, but usability is a common complaint. That's why Drupal 7 (the next major version being developed right now) is under going a usability revamp.
Why would themers produce propaganda? That doesn't even make sense. I've found the themeing in Drupal to be much more robust than Joomla or Wordpress, and also easy if you're willing to actually read the documentation.
The module search isn't very good on drupal.org right now, but that's why it's being revamped with the site redesign that's currently being worked on. See: http://groups.drupal.org/drupalorg-redesign-plan-d ... -- and until then: http://drupalmodules.com/ - serif69, on 02/19/2009, -1/+5What the ***** is "Protecting the Vulnerable"?
- MrChunks, on 02/20/2009, -0/+4I spent two weeks trying to build a website in Joomla 1.5. When the client was unable to add new content to the site without around 15 clicks, I decided to rebuild the site in Drupal, which I did overnight.
Tell me how this is efficient for adding new content:
1. Add new article
2. Menu Manager
3. Edit Menu Items
4. Select Menu Type
5. Edit Menu Type - Title, Alias etc. - and select Article
That was 5 steps which took over 10 clicks simply to write an article and publish it. Why can't Joomla auto-publish stories to a menu? In Drupal I can do all this on the same "Create Content" page. It's two steps - Create content, select content type. Bosh.
If you do anything more complex than that, then add an additional 10-15 steps. I wanted to do something as simple as automatically linking an article to a menu. I was recommended using the latest_news module. But latest news isn't a menu, so you have to then create a menu so you can actually access your article. The biggest problem that Joomla has is that an article doesn't really relate to anything. - MrChunks, on 02/19/2009, -0/+4No it's not, it was all about Drupal. What are you talking about? Wordpress wasn't mentioned once in the story.
- MrChunks, on 02/19/2009, -3/+7Joomla is terrible. It's absolutely shockingly bad. The way it handles content is just nasty, and I don't mean that in a good way.
- peterjmag, on 02/19/2009, -0/+4And based on my (albeit moderate) experience with Wordpress, it's not exactly a benchmark for site security either.
- mikeyp51, on 02/19/2009, -1/+4Drupal was using many common design patterns long before it came en vogue to have 3 letter acronyms describe the 1970s design theory that you based your framework on. If you actually understand modular programming and *gasp* functional programming, you will see that OOP is not the be all end all answer.
- amoeba, on 02/20/2009, -0/+3Great choice! Drupal is awesome - flexible and extensible, has a great code base and even better community - the more open-source in government the better
- ejde, on 02/20/2009, -0/+3It's a matter of understanding how Joomla works. You can use sections and categories to automatically publish content. Not to mention the myriad content oriented components and plugins available - many as non-commercial offerings easily found on the Joomla site.
Personally, I think it's a strength that articles don't have to relate to anything in Joomla. The flexibility is a good thing. And, you can re-purpose the same article in various locations. Furthermore, you certainly don't need to create a menu item to access a module (which is different than an article). Modules can get published on any page (whereas articles are typically only linked from a menu), and can further be controlled using the built-in ACL functionality. If you want to build your own module containing custom HTML, it's also part of the stock Joomla install. So, there is built-in flexibility. You just need to learn it.
Bear in mind, Drupal is on version 6.x. Joomla is still in 1.x. The system is much less mature. But, it's growing at least as fast. FWIW, I think Drupal's own site is a mess, with "contributions" listed in a way that's pretty hard to read and sift through. I haven't spent much time in Drupal, but I remain just as underwhelmed as you are about Joomla. I think it's safe to say that better mousetraps lay ahead. - stubear, on 02/19/2009, -1/+4Expression Engine (www.expressionengine.com). It was used for Change.gov, why not Recovery.gov too?
- MrChunks, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3Why is drupal a piece of *****? Can you give reasons?
- seventhc, on 02/19/2009, -1/+4They would at least turn on "clean url's" instead of that default node crap.
- Ghoul, on 02/19/2009, -0/+3Did you actually read the article at http://api.drupal.org/api/file/developer/topics/oo ... ?
- strictnein, on 02/19/2009, -1/+4I feel like I'm missing something here...
- mikeyp51, on 02/20/2009, -1/+3Uhm, the Drupal security team does an excellent job handling any security issues that come up. It is in fact their honesty to call a security release a security release that many use against them. They are not afraid to tell users when an updates is in fact security related. Many other CMSs only release 'updates' which may or may not contain security related fixes, they won't tell you.
Also the Drupal security team manages security announcements for all contributed Drupal modules. This is something like an additional 4000+ projects and code bases. When you factor that in the amount of security releases there is quite small. - kdeez, on 02/20/2009, -0/+2Yes, the search has been bad, but significant work has recently gone into improvements for it. You will see it improve soon.
In the meantime you can use this Google custom search that I use. It produces extremely relevant results:
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=0119866162537862 ... - zeromerk, on 02/20/2009, -1/+3It's called search engine optimization.
- prodigitalson, on 02/19/2009, -0/+2Itd be nice if they built modularly on an existing framework like Symfony, CI, or Cake. I dont care whichas long as its not Zend... thats my main issue with Drupal and most other CMSes. They use their own framework (if you can even call it that in some cases). I'd much rather see a suite of Cake or SF plugins. That way its easier to write modules that have uses outside of a given CMS with little to no refactoring.
- HonoredMule, on 02/20/2009, -0/+2I strongly agree with MrChunks, and I've only ever tried 1.5. I couldn't believe how haphazard and irrationally structured that system was, and component integration (things like forums and wikis) was a nightmare. It's ***** like Joomla that makes me dread having to support other people's websites.
- agentVivid, on 02/19/2009, -0/+2stsadm –o deletewebapp -url "http://www.gop.com"
- bean1975, on 02/19/2009, -1/+3The use or not use of the "class" construct does not make the code more or less OOP.
- ejde, on 02/19/2009, -1/+3Personal opinion. You might want to revisit Joomla. It's grown a lot lately, and has seen a much wider range of uses. If you haven't checked out 1.5, a lot has changed since 1.0. There is also a huge developer community, which is constantly releasing new and refining existing components and modules.
- JKAL, on 02/19/2009, -0/+2Yes, they do know and acknowledge and as you pointed out fully disclose and not hide the fact that the current version is not real OOP, you will find this fact in most of the documentation. However the next version is been fully recoded with OOP in all it's glory.
So.... your point was?
Instead of just plain bashing, why not give an example of a better alternative or at least advice the n00bs what to look out for when hunting for a CMS. - kdeez, on 02/20/2009, -0/+2That would be nice but in order for the modules to be able to interact with each other and provide useful functionality required for most sites these days, those frameworks would need to be built up to include more "content management" type of functionality. That's where Drupal fits nicely in the middle by providing a good balance between acting as a framework for developers and providing advanced features/functionality for non developers through modules.
- kdeez, on 02/20/2009, -0/+2Yes, but many developers choose to use it as a higher level framework as well.
- prodigitalson, on 02/20/2009, -0/+1Not nessecarily... You would jsut need to implement Drupal to spec in accordance with the chosen framework. So instead of just drupal you would have a series of "plugin modules" like DrupalCore, DrupalTaxonomy, DrupalTheme, etc.. then DrupalCore might have a series of config attributes specifying factories for Theme, Taxonomy, Login, etc.. That way you could swap those modules with any other existing modules you wanted so long as you implemented the required Drupal API for using them. And since they are built on using the framework you could reuse the Drupal* modules in other projects utilizing the same without actually using all of Drupal.
- HonoredMule, on 02/20/2009, -0/+1OOP is the latest syntax for organizational structures that were used in one form or another all along. But don't tell them that...the OOP generation graduates think they're really on to something truly revolutionary.
While not truly revolutionary, however, OOP is a convenience. The mere simplicity of having widely-understood syntax that describes the structural format is a significant evolutionary step. Until you pull a Java and take OOP to extremes, becoming so verbose and indirect that people will commit terrorist acts just to shut you up, that convenience leads to more consistent and concise code--and thus also more readable and understandable--which is actually a pretty big deal. - CoolGoose, on 02/19/2009, -1/+2Drupal just updated it's website to use Drupal6 and a major redesign is in the works.
- inactive, on 02/20/2009, -0/+1Yay Drupal! My favorite CMS
- stacks14, on 02/19/2009, -1/+2you like pretending that you know what you're talking about
- JKAL, on 02/19/2009, -0/+1yeah, just like 54321... to a disk format,
of course if your give ADMIN access to just anyone you run a risk of malicious activity. - BossKey, on 02/21/2009, -0/+1"Cover Your Ass"
- kenyob, on 05/06/2009, -0/+1The original digg link is broken.
Here is the working one:
http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/why-white-hous ... - Aitese, on 02/20/2009, -2/+3I'm trying my hardest to understand why something as inconsequential as this is important to you guys...clean url's? Really?
- Aitese, on 02/24/2009, -0/+1Exactly...so as a DEVELOPER you develop YOUR site however you want to. If the Developer here decides to make HIS life harder, why are all YOU guys so pissed?!
- Sassysalesgirl, on 09/04/2009, -0/+1well said ! hear hear!
- kdeez, on 02/20/2009, -0/+1That makes sense and is an interesting idea. It would be quite a bit of work and hopefully it wouldn't impact the performance too much. Drop me a line when you have the fork going so I can test... ;-)
-
Show 51 - 74 of 74 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is